Just before 4 a.m., Seth Grim was driving a 1998 Ford Explorer with Pennsylvania plates and rolled it over on Interstate 79 near Amma, West Virginia. A dog tried to jump out of the window, which might have helped cause the wreck. Unfortunately, the dog later died and Grim was taken to the hospital with minor injuries to his upper torso.

Here's where the story gets wacky. In the back of his explorer were 35 to 40 chickens along with an AK-47 and a large amount of ammunition. Also in the back of his vehicle was a device that police were extremely concerned about. The "improvised explosives" prompted a higher level of response.

The West Virginia State Police Bomb Squad out of Williamson was sent to the scene and removed the device.

Initially, all of the chickens were reported to have made it out alive. Our reporter, who was on site during the shutdown of the interstate, tells us that some of the chickens died.

I-79 is now back open.

Seth Grim is being charged with possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver. Officers saw a quart jar of what they believed to be marijuana in the front seat. He's being held in the South Central Regional Jail on a $25,000 bond.

Not so much gun porn as trying to do your heads since there also was a gun store next door to the presidential palace when I was in Paris. I can't imagine that in the US (i.e., next door to the White House).

And they sold switchblades. When I lived in Europe [1], switchblades were sold all over the place.

This is bullshit. People who know the Amish more than I do about them than I do are irate about this show. The Amish are fairly tight, but they aren't totally closed off from society (just go to Reading Terminal).

It's not clear how the Amish themselves
view the brouhaha. One, a man named Jake who asked only to be
identified by his first name, said he had not seen the show and had no
desire to.

"I know it's not legit. I was kinda on the sidelines cheering it
would go away faster than it came," he said. Jake said he appreciated
the rising opposition against the show. Given the opportunity to watch a
neighbor's television, he said he'd prefer to peek at a football game.
"An Eagles game - all the boys love that," he said.

Come on Discovery Channel, go back to things that educate people rather than titillate them. This is titillation: not education.

A Quincy man will be sentenced to probation after he pleaded
guilty to accidently shooting a friend to death earlier this year.

Zachary W. Ballinger, 21, wept in court Wednesday as he admitted to
accidentally killing Austin M. Hermann, 21, during an incident early
March 23 at Ballinger's residence on South 24th. Ballinger pleaded
guilty to one count of involuntary manslaughter and one count of
unlawful possession with intent to deliver cannabis.

State's Attorney Jon Barnard
said. "Probation not only includes the option of jail time, but that is
certainly something that is appropriate in this case."

Ballinger told deputies that he had accidently shot Hermann
on the porch of the residence.

In the recorded statement, Ballinger said
he and Hermann had been out drinking before going to Ballinger's
residence to play video games. While they were playing video games, they
noticed an AR-15 rifle in the room. They went outside with the rifle,
and Ballinger pointed at Hermann.

"Ballinger said that he thought the
safety was on and didn't think there was a bullet in the chamber."

Hermann was pronounced dead from a single gunshot wound at 5:57 a.m.

The 6 ways to ensure that you do time for an accidental shooting:

1. do it in a residential area
2. lie to the police
3. hide evidence
4. have neck tattoos
5. have dred locks
6. be black or Hispanic

A 12-year-old boy died Saturday after being shot in the head with a pellet gun.
Justin Ingle, 12,
was taken to a McAlester hospital Friday after being shot and was flown
to a Tulsa hospital where he died Saturday.

“Two boys were playing with a
high-powered pellet gun, and one boy pulled the trigger and hit the
other in the head,” Pittsburg County Sheriff Joel Kerns said.

Ingle’s
mother was at home when the shooting happened but was in another room,
Kerns said. She rushed the boy to the hospital in her own car after he
was shot.

A Havelock man was arrested on Tuesday after what police described as
an accidental shooting that sent one person to the hospital.

Police responded to a call of shots fired at a mobile home near Lejeune
Boulevard. There, Desmond Hill, 21, of Glen Drive in Havelock, was
charged by the Jacksonville Police Department with discharging a firearm
within the city limits and resisting, delaying or obstructing a police
officer.

Capt. Patricia Driggers, a spokesperson for the Jacksonville Police
Department, officers were called to the mobile home on Tuesday. Investigators believe the shooting was
accidental, Driggers said, but added that the case is still under
investigation.

The 6 ways to ensure that you get arrested for an accidental shooting:

1. do it in a residential area
2. lie to the police
3. hide evidence
4. have neck tattoos
5. have dred locks
6. be black or Hispanic

I am amazed at how much the Second Amendment debate is held in ignorance: in particular, this case should be front and centre.

I should add that as long as the "civic right" interpretation of the Second Amendment is out there, this is still a valid case. In fact, while the Heller-McDonald line of cases said this may no longer be applicable, the fact that the court said that "to drill or parade with arms, without, and independent
of, an act of Congress or law of the State authorizing the same" would relate to public order means that this is a very relevant case to a world where people want to openly carry arms in public.

Facts:

Herman Presser was part of a citizen militia group, the Lehr und Wehr Verein (Instruct and Defend Association), a group of armed ethnic German workers, associated with the Socialist Labor Party. The group had been formed to counter the armed private armies of companies in Chicago.

The indictment charged in substance that Presser, on September 24, 1879, in the county of Cook, in the State of Illinois,
"did unlawfully belong to, and did parade and drill in the city of
Chicago with an unauthorized body of men with arms, who had associated
themselves together as a military company and organization, without
having a license from the Governor, and not being a part of, or
belonging to, 'the regular organized volunteer militia' of the State of
Illinois, or the troops of the United States." A motion to quash the
indictment was overruled. Presser then pleaded not guilty, and both
parties having waived a jury the case was tried by the court, which
found Presser guilty and sentenced him to pay a fine of $10.

In December 1879, marched at the head of said company, about four
hundred in number, in the streets of the city of Chicago, he riding on
horseback and in command; that the company was armed with rifles and
Presser with a cavalry sword; that the company had no license from the
governor of Illinois to drill or parade as a part of the militia of the
State, and was not a part of the regular organized militia of the State,
nor a part of troops of the United States, and had no organization
under the militia law of the United States.

Presser
claimed the law violated his rights under the Second Amendment.

Holding:

"Unless restrained by their own constitutions, state legislatures may
enact statutes to control and regulate all organizations, drilling, and
parading of military bodies and associations except those which are
authorized by the militia laws of the United States."

The Presser Court said:

It is undoubtedly true that all citizens capable of bearing arms
constitute the reserved military force or reserve militia of the United
States as well as of the States, and in view of this prerogative of the
general government, as well as of its general powers, the States cannot,
even laying the constitutional provision in question out of view,
prohibit the people from keeping and bearing arms, so as to deprive the
United States of their rightful resource for maintaining the public
security, and disable the people from performing their duty to the
general government. But, as already stated, we think it clear that the
sections under consideration do not have this effect.

The Court emphatically disposed of Presser's argument that there
exists a right to assemble, drill, or march in a militia independent of
authorization by state or federal law:

The right voluntarily to associate together as a military company or
organization or to drill or parade with arms, without, and independent
of, an act of Congress or law of the State authorizing the same, is not
an attribute of national citizenship. Military organization and military
drill and parade under arms are subjects especially under the control
of the government of every country. They cannot be claimed as a right
independent of law. Under our political system they are subject to the
regulation and control of the State and Federal governments, acting in
due regard to their respective prerogatives and powers. The Constitution
and laws of the United States will be searched in vain for any support
to the view that these rights are privileges and immunities of citizens
of the United States independent of some specific legislation on the
subject.

In other word, as I have been saying all along, you do not belong to a "Constitutional Militia" unless you belong to an actual serving organisation which is organised under Article I, Section 8, Clauses 15 & 16 of the United States Constitution. As per Article VI, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution, that body is the National Guard: whether you like it or not.

In fact, reading Presser, it's pretty clear that the "unorganised militia" argument is seriously nonsensical from a legal point standpoint. There is no basis for claiming that a reserve pool with no obligation of service (hence Unorganised, Sedentary, reserve, inactive, general or other term indicating INACTIVITY Militia) has any "right" to arms.

This is especially true if your unit was not created by act of congress and under some form of governmental control.

I would also add that local governments are probably on good ground in strictly regulating open carry rallies by combining this case with the comment in Heller that:

Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not
unlimited. From Blackstone through the 19th-century cases, commentators
and courts routinely explained that the right was not a right to keep
and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for
whatever purpose. See, e.g., Sheldon, in 5 Blume 346; Rawle 123; Pomeroy
152–153; Abbott 333. For example, the majority of the 19th-century
courts to consider the question held that prohibitions on carrying
concealed weapons were lawful under the Second Amendment or state
analogues. See, e.g., State v. Chandler, 5 La. Ann., at 489–490; Nunn v.
State, 1 Ga., at 251; see generally 2 Kent *340, n. 2; The American
Students’ Blackstone 84, n. 11 (G. Chase ed. 1884).

Additionally, as I pointed out before the First Amendment protect peaceable assembly. Any armed group is not "peaceable" in any realistic sense of that word.

MikeB: “…are you OK with folks who have been involuntarily committed to mental hospitals being disarmed?”

Yes, but that’s existing law, and not what we’re talking about here.

Because it's existing law that makes it ok for you? That doesn't sound right.

You're concerned that too many people suffer from depression and so few of them end up committing suicide, well so what. I say the first thing we do is change the way we look at the 2nd Amendment - either that or repeal it. Then we institute proper gun control which includes licensing for gun ownership. People who suffer from depression don't qualify. Simple.

The determination can be made by a physical and psychological examination prior to granting the gun owner's license. It wouldn't be 100% perfect but urinalysis and blood tests, part of any good physical, would reveal those on medication and the psyche exam would pick up some of the others.

No need to violate anyone's private relationship with their health care providers.

When they sped to a quiet neighborhood of well-trimmed lawns on a recent Friday morning after a 911 call, Saddle Brook police figured they were about to confront an angry wife who had reportedly stabbed her husband.What the police encountered now appears to have evolved into a constitutional debate over privacy and gun rights.

Sometimes small local disputes can touch on deep, divisive national debates. That seems to be the legacy of a husband-wife quarrel between Robert and Eileen Lintner at their home on Washington Street in Saddle Brook.

Police say that just after 9 a.m. on Aug. 8, they received a report that Eileen, 64, had stabbed her 65-year-old husband in the neck.
Robert Lintner’s wound was not fatal — he was treated at Hackensack University Medical Center and released.

Eileen Lintner was charged with second-degree aggravated assault and illegal possession of a weapon — a knife.
But as they typically do in domestic disputes, police separated the husband and wife for questioning. Then, in what police say is also standard procedure in such cases, they asked the Lintners, “Do you have any firearms in the house?”

Robert Lintner had almost 200 guns, most of them locked in steel vaults, police said. And he refused their request to enter the house and examine the weapons, for which the police say he had proper owner’s permits.

Come join 13-year-old Brenna Strong along with her mom, Bea, and her dad, Richard, as they spend a typical Saturday running errands and having fun together. What's not so typical is that Brenna's parents lawfully open carry handguns for self-defense. The Strongs join a growing number of families that are standing up for their 2nd Amendment rights by open carrying and bringing gun ownership out of the closet and into the mainstream.

A gun dealer based out of East Hempfield Township was facing charges
Friday that he sold more than 30 guns for a customer, then kept the
profits for himself.

John P. Radzik, 37, president of Gun Dealer Online LLC, was charged
with a single count of theft by deception, according to court records.
He was ordered held on $10,000 bail, which posted to secure his
release earlier Friday afternoon, records state.

Charging documents indicate Radzik pocketed almost $20,000 of a customer's money, after their agreed upon commission rate.

While the sole charge against Radzik relates to a single victim, East
Hempfield Township police Lt. Tammy R. Marsh said additional victims
have since stepped forward to report similar incidents involving Radzik
and more charges were likely.

A 14-year-old boy was accidentally shot in the face Thursday while he and a friend were handling a gun, police said.

The boy was taken to St. John Hospital and then by LifeFlight to
Oregon Health & Science University in Portland. He was bleeding from
the head, according to police.

They said a 15-year-old boy who lives at the home found a hidden key
to the gun safe and was able to get to a handgun inside. The 15-year-old
told police that the gun went off as he was putting it back in the gun
safe.

Both parents were at work at the time of the shooting. Police said
the 15-year-old had been told not to have friends over when the parents
weren’t there.

Police said the parents told them they didn’t think their children knew where the gun safe key was hidden.

Monday, August 18, 2014

Robert Young Pelton routinely lists the US as one of his World's Most Dangerous places in his books of the same name because of the high level of "gun violence". It's not cowardice to be concerned about your safety, especially if one is a tourist in a nation.

Personally, I would seriously reconsider going to places in the US with insane gun laws that allow for people to carry weapons in public and kill other people.

That is a sensible economic choice, which may soak in to the legislators if their constituents start losing tourist cash.

The Alaska Republican said granting legal status to a large number of
illegal immigrants would lead to more Democratic voters, who would in
turn enact more gun restrictions and promote more anti-gun judges.

“If 20 million illegals vote, you can kiss the Second Amendment goodbye,” a recent Miller campaign mailer says.

“There’s a clear correlation, and the clear correlation is this: If
you end up granting amnesty to those who don’t value gun rights, who
have not been raised in an environment where the Second Amendment is
cherished—is considered to be a God-given right—the reality is over a
generation or two, the likelihood is very strong that the Second
Amendment will not be here,” Miller said.

This seems appropriate given some of my posts, including the Andy Griffith Show clip:

I’m not anti-cop. And I am finding that many police want change as well:
The good officers in the state of Wisconsin supported our bill from the
inside, and it was endorsed by five police unions. But I also think the
days of Andy Griffith and the Mayberry peacekeeper are over. As we can
see in the streets of Ferguson, today’s police are also much more
heavily equipped, armed and armored—more militarized. They are moving to
more paramilitary-type operations as well, and all those shifts call
for more transparency and more rules of restraint. And yet they are even
less accountable in some ways than the U.S. military in which I served.
Our citizens need protection from undue force, here in our own country,
and now.

Sunday, August 17, 2014

The usual pro-gun argument about the term "well-regulated" in the Second Amendment is that it has something to do with the militia being well-trained, but like most of the mythology surrounding the Second Amendment this takes that passage out of historical and political context.

I like to cite to Adam Smith's comment in wealth of nations that:

This distinction being well understood, the history of all ages, it will
be found, bears testimony to the irresistible superiority which a
well-regulated standing army has over a militia.[1]

This could would be scary if the meaning were "well-trained" rather
than a standing army firmly under civilian control since the fear was
that a well-trained, well-armed, professional military could indeed overrun a poorly
trained civilian force.

Additionally, the Constitution was partially a response to Shays Rebellion, which was an out of control mob: not a militia. Shays Rebellion was firmly in the minds of the people who were debating the Constitution and its ratification. They would not have wanted a militia which was not firmly under control.

As I have said before, the issue isn't personal arms in the Constitutional debates as much as it is the nature of the defence establishment and civilian control over the military. To say that the term "well-regulated" does not refer to making sure that the militia is firmly under civilian control is to show a degree of historical ignorance which is staggering

Where this falls into the topic of a militarised police force isn't so much that a police force is like Scotland Yard or the French Gendarmerie Nationale as much as that it is firmly under civilian control and well-regulated by rules and procedures which protect the people.

A strong, independent judiciary is a necessary institution in such a society to make sure that the military/police are kept under control. That was why the Constitution specifically sets limits for the Judiciary and guarantees protections in the legal process, both civil and criminal.

As another commenter said, "well-regulated means exactly that", whether one is talking about militias or professional military.

On August 5, a man named John Crawford was playing
with a toy rifle in an Ohio Wal-Mart. Someone called 911, and police
showed up and shot him in the chest. He died.

On August 9, a man named Michael Brown was walking in the street in Ferguson, Missouri, when a police officer stopped him. According to the friend
that was with him, Brown put his hands up to show that he was unarmed.
The officer shot him in the back. Brown's body was left in the street
for hours before being removed.

Since then, the incident in Ferguson has
overshadowed the Ohio Wal-Mart shooting. Protesters have been gathering,
and demanding answers from the police, who have become increasingly
skittish and violent. Journalists are being told to turn off their cameras, local residents are getting tear gassed.

Nobody knows exactly what happened, but whatever
the facts may be, things certainly look bad now. To most Americans, this
is the stuff of horror films: A sleepy rural town being terrorised by
an advanced military.All of this then, begs the question: Where is the National Rifle Association (NRA), and where is the Tea Party?

Ohio, after all, is an open-carry state, which
means that people are allowed to carry guns wherever they choose. This
is a right flaunted often by white gun activists, who like to take assault rifles to shopping malls. So why isn't the NRA making noise about John Crawford?And police firing into crowds of protestors,
blocking media access, and enforcing a 9 pm curfew in a residential
area: Isn't this the big-government tyranny that the Tea Party has been
talking about since its inception? Why aren't they sending a militia to
Ferguson?The answer to these questions is simple, of course: Both John Crawford and Michael Brown were black.